Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify what consensus/majority means #259

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 22, 2019

Conversation

dwijnand
Copy link
Member

Thank you, @jethrogb, for the suggestion!

Fixes #258

@jethrogb
Copy link

Not sure if this is what I suggested exactly, this is now wrong for reviewer set sizes under 5.

@anp
Copy link
Member

anp commented Jan 27, 2019

I need to check the code again, but aren’t we looking for a quorum here, not a specific number?

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member Author

@jethrogb thanks, I reworded it. WDYT?

@anp The criteria was tweaked in #188 (and that change is what's currently used).

@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Jan 27, 2019

This looks correct... but there are travis failures for unrelated reasons :(

@jethrogb
Copy link

No it's wrong now, it should be "at most 2"

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member Author

Ugh, 2 strikes. 3rd time's the charm? Thanks, @jethrogb...

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member Author

dwijnand commented Feb 7, 2019

This is just a messaging tweak. Can it be merged without CI validation passes, @anp? I can drop the rust-toolchain update commit if need be.

@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Feb 22, 2019

Let's run this through travis again :)

@Centril Centril closed this Feb 22, 2019
@Centril Centril reopened this Feb 22, 2019
@dwijnand
Copy link
Member Author

✅!

@Centril Centril merged commit 56c0607 into rust-lang:master Feb 22, 2019
@dwijnand dwijnand deleted the clarify-consensus branch February 22, 2019 14:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants